Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sonu Alias Sunil @ Jasrath vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 September, 2021
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No.43084/2021
(Sonu alias Sunil alias Jasrath Vs. The State of M.P.)
(1)
Gwalior, dated : 01/9/2021
Shri Rishikesh Bohare, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Manish Nayak, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Case diary perused.
The applicant has filed this repeat application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The first one was rejected on merits vide order dated 23/4/2018 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 13439/2018.
The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Kumbhraj, District Guna, in connection with Crime No.107/2016 registered in relation to the offences punishable under sections 364A, 323, 325, 34 of the IPC.
Prosecution story, in nutshell, is that complainant Cheetarlal lodged a report to the effect that on 09/04/2016, he was going to Village Kumbhraj on Motorcycle of Kaluram. After 2-3 kms. five unknown persons came on the road and asked Kaluram's name who told them his name. Thereafter, they forcibly made Kaluram sit on their Motorcycle. One of them caused injury by opposite side of Pharsi to complainant. When he could manage to take the Pharsi, they pointed out Katta towards him, thereafter, the complainant ran towards an agricultural field. They took Kaluram with them saying that if ransom was not paid by the family members of Kaluram, they would kill him. On the basis of the aforesaid, offence was registered HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.43084/2021 (Sonu alias Sunil alias Jasrath Vs. The State of M.P.) (2) and during investigation applicant was apprehended.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated. He is in jail since 20/7/17. No Test Identifiation Parade has been conducted. The applicant has been implicated on the basis of memorandum under section 27 of the Evidence Act. Co-accused has already been granted bail vide order dated 22/1/18 passed in M.Cr.C. No.22880/17 and the case of applicant is on better footing than that of co-accused. Earlier, the application was rejected on the ground that the applicant is a habitual offender, inasmuch as 14 cases have been registered against him, therefore, there is no parity. Learned counsel submits that due to COVID-19 outbreak, the trial is held-up and is at the stage of recording of evidence according to order-sheet dated 24/5/2021 filed along with the application. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time. He has already put in incarceration of more than four years and cannot be kept in jail for indefinite period. He is a permanent resident of Village Keshopura, P.S. Kumbhraj, District Guna and there is no likelihood of his absconsion, if released on bail. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. Attention has been invited to applicant's criminal antecedents of 14 cases.
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.43084/2021 (Sonu alias Sunil alias Jasrath Vs. The State of M.P.) (3) However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits of the rival contentions at this juncture.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration the period of custody put in by the applicant coupled with the fact that trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court. The applicant shall also furnish a written undertaking that he will abide by the terms and conditions of various circulars, as well as, orders issued by the Central Government, State Government and local administration from time to time such as maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene etc. to avoid proliferation of Corona virus.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The applicant shall install Aarogya Setu App (if not already installed) in his mobile phone.
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.43084/2021 (Sonu alias Sunil alias Jasrath Vs. The State of M.P.) (4)
2. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
3. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
4. The applicant will not indulge in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
7. If the applicant commits any offence while on bail, this order shall automatically stand cancelled without reference to the Court.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S.A.Dharmadhikari) Judge (and) ANAND SHRIVASTAVA 2021.09.02 10:44:43 +05'30'